Managing Agile Team

[FrankFo]

We are interested in having a phone conversation with anyone that is managing tasks and projects using AGILE in Workfront. We have been using Workfront for a little over 6 months now and are struggling with how to manage iterations where at the end of the iteration there remains tasks that are not complete. We notice that the planned completion date changes if the task is moved to the next or a future iteration. Additionally we would just like to share ideas and how you manage projects and tasks using the AGILE approach in Workfront. - Thanks Frank Fornataro DHHS

[BillGe1]

Hi Frank - Our teams have tried the AGILE tools in WF and didn't get very far. Most of the metrics I use for my teams aren't really available in WF, so we continue to manage my wholly agile teams in TFS. I want to get everyone into WF, but it just doesn't seem to be up to snuff for what I need. I shared several of those similar issues with their product team, hoping we see some improvement in a future iteration (which they said they were working on). I really do NOT like the iterations. I found it difficult to move stories from one to another, and the tool really hindered my team's progress. I'd love to chat about some things we've found and maybe some best practices, though. I want to give it another shot some day. Bill Bill Gentilesco Commerce Bancshares, Inc.

[JaneBr]

Hi Frank We are also starting out on our Agile journey and are in the process of trialling the Agile Scrum functionality in Workfront. It's very early days and, as we have no experience of other Agile tools, we have nothing to compare it against. I'd therefore be keen to find out from anyone who is using Workfront or interfacing with another tool. Cheers Jane Jane Bradshaw BAKKAVOR LTD

[ChristianBa3]

Hi Frank, For incomplete tasks, we first discuss as a team why the scope was not delivered and then we split the task by adding a part 2, 3, 4 etc directly on the current iteration storyboard. We set the former as complete, if we delivered part of the scope, and leave the part 2 task in the new column, splitting the story points/effort as necessary. When we create a new iteration, if not done so in advance, we then transfer the incomplete scope into the next iteration (or replan into future iterations or transfer to the backlog). From there, we continue as normal, planning new work from the backlog if capacity is available, providing all project stakeholders with an executive summary of progress, plans etc using the automated WF reports. Whilst we run this exercise as a group it's the SM/PM who handles a lot of administration of the iteration/task planning. This means the team can focus on what they do best with the only expectation that they update/work through their ticket throughout the sprint. The team has been using this approach for the past 2 years and it has proven to be very productive. Don't hesitate to ask if you have any follow-up questions etc. Best, Christian Christian Barnes Dentsu Aegis Network

[JaneBr]

Hi Christian Do you manage your Product Backlog in Workfront in the form of a Project plan? If so, how detailed are your stories/tasks here? Cheers Jane Jane Bradshaw BAKKAVOR LTD

[ChristianBa3]

Hi Jane, We usually create two projects. One that details the project in the form of a WBS, potentially higher level, with milestones etc and then a standalone project which acts as the product or project backlog. We could merge these and leverage parent tasks but it's cumbersome to maintain project plan quality. To combat reporting, we use different project statuses, for example, live - in progress and live - agile project. This helps us to manage data at the 40,000ft level. In terms of task/story details, we capture all sorts of reference information depending on the service type and client requirements. For example, if we're working across a clients web ecosystem, we may want to capture which domain we need to work on, impacted stores, product category etc. That is definitely one of Workfront's best qualities being able to create new fields and add them in the views. We usually create general custom fields like 'Generic Field 1', 'Generic Field 2' to minimise system complexity but still enable users to mould their process into the framework. Best, Christian Christian Barnes Dentsu Aegis Network

[TegwynSt]

Hi Frank - I'd also love to have a conversation about merging waterfall and agile/scrum. We have developed a method that appears to be working (square peg, round hole though it might be). We are creating 2 schedules within one project....1 for scrum (where dates get thrown out the window thanks to ever powerful sprints) and 1 for production so the actual final deliverable stays on track..... this is a totally different approach to where we started.....currently we have requests queues that get routed to specific teams and our productions team(s) convert all the projects. new way will be marketing converting their own with a short scrum schedule and once appropriate forms are added the assign directly, or a task is ready for production to add creative schedule. *****If anyone is doing anything similar I'd love to talk about it ! this is a HUGE company-wide initiative and I am the only admin so feeling quite overwhelmed. Tegwyn Stockdale Workfront System Admin / Production Coordinator BayCare Clearwater, Florida

[NRYNR]

Hi Jane, While I don't spend much time in agile, I have tinkered with it enough to know that you can make it work if you keep it simple. Earlier this week, I setup an agile team along with a queue and some dashboards and they're already off and running. They turn issues into tasks and assign tasks to the agile team. I have other teams who have been using it for months and love it. However, they've gone all crazy with pulling in custom fields and using a bunch of statuses, which just messes things up in my opinion. My advice is to keep it simple and functional, no matter what you're building in Workfront. Thanks, Narayan

[NRYNR]

Hi @Frank Fornataro , I wanted to share more on Workfront and agile from my experience... Tasks on projects can be assigned to agile teams. In fact, this has always been a feature and whether or not a team is considered agile has nothing to do with features in the software. Workfront did add some features in support of agile, including story boards and iterations, which definitely helped win over some people who practice agile. However, these features are not a requirement for agile. I'm of the belief that if you can't use the software in its most basic format for agile collaboration, then adding a bunch of other features isn't going to help. Perhaps there are some "can't live without" features out there, but I have yet to come across one. When it comes to digital collaboration and work management, Workfront will always outperform other agile tools on the market because of how configurable and feature rich it is. Of course, all of the agile tools claim that they can do the same as Workfront or better, but they can't. Rally, VersionOne, Jira,... none of them stack up because they lack Workfront's recipe for modern digital collaboration. And this is where I think organizations get themselves into trouble, when they let other applications encroach on Workfront's role in the ecosystem. I encourage you to make sure that you're using Workfront for everything work management/operations and nothing more. Those bells and whistles other "real" agile tools offer might not be available in Workfront, and hopefully they won't be because Workfront can't do it all, but I guarantee your teams can practice agile and use storyboards just fine in Workfront as it exists today. Thanks, Narayan